C. Analytical Data

To examine program effects for the IPV and you will paths, the analysis rooked using a great cutoff threshold placed on an ongoing program qualifications index (PMT get) to recognize therapy and you will research organizations. Therefore, results are valid to your people in the tolerance and you can manage perhaps not depict a full shipment out of socioeconomic status within the analysis groups. Because an effective discontinuity is employed to your project of medication, i be certain that the problems that normally need hold having a regular regression discontinuity framework approach to be valid inside our study, in addition to zero control at the tolerance or knowledge of brand new algorithm from the prospective beneficiaries so you can influence their qualification status. The latest authoritative take to from balance between comparison and cures groups is actually plus stated towards the latest sample during the dining tables dos and 3 (col. 10). On complete concentrating on get it done presented, new PMT results varied of ?step three.294 to 4.601 z-score, while in the investigations attempt, the latest PMT ratings start around ?0.571 so you can 0.324 z-ratings, for the program qualifications cutoff in the ?0.106 z-score ( basic departure = 0.thirty two ). six Homes had been methodically sampled within cutoff to possess assessment purposes, and the ensuing homes about therapy sample is in this 0.46 practical deviations of one’s cutoff, and all sorts of research home is within 0.43 standard deviations of your cutoff. Because of the small threshold of shipping off sampled home to the latest PMT score, a straightforward Did was applied to check on new has an effect on of your own program: seven

Manage details found in the research provided personal- and you will house-height evidence and society-top fixed effects. 8 In the individual top, we managed to have ages (in years) and you may evidence when it comes down to authoritative studies off each other lady and you can companion. 9 Then, inside the data of your own full decide to try, we handle for being from inside the an effective polygamous union (reference group was nonpolygamous otherwise, getting ease of dysfunction, a beneficial monogamous connection). Household-peak handle parameters incorporated house proportions therefore the PMT score. 10 We report the fresh new manner of the district signal details in descriptive balance and you can attrition tables; although not, while we tend to be area-peak repaired consequences, such symptoms aren’t utilized in regression research (districts: East Mamprusi, Karaga, and you may Yendi throughout the Northern Part and Bongo and you can Garu Tempane on Top East Area). To assess differences from the family unit members construction, i interact the latest indicator to have polygamous relationship into the therapy indicator, date sign, and you may impression imagine (doing a triple telecommunications term): eleven

D. Attrition

Attrition over the panel period has potential to threaten the internal validity and generalizability of the findings. Overall attrition in our analytic sample is approximately 10%, slightly higher than the overall household sample rate of 6.6%, and does not vary significantly between treatment and comparison samples ( p -value = .35 using a simple t-test; Table 1). Further, we investigate whether the sample lost to follow-up differs significantly from our panel sample in terms of IPV outcomes, control variables, or https://datingranking.net/dating/ pathway indicators (tables 2, 3). Column 7 shows the mean difference between the sample lost to follow-up in the treatment group, as compared with the same in the comparison group. Column 8 shows the p-value of this difference derived from a regression using treatment to predict the specific indicator, controlling for the PMT score and restricting to attritors. Table 2 shows that across 12 background characteristics and 14 pathway variables, only one is significant at the p < .05 level (there is a statistically significantly higher proportion of the treatment group lost to follow-up as compared with the comparison group in Bongo district). Table 3 shows that across 15 outcome indicators, the only ones to show evidence of differential attrition at p < .05 or lower are those measuring the frequency of sexual IPV (means of those lost to follow-up in the comparison group are slightly higher at .28 vs. the treatment group at .26). These results indicate that the potential for bias in overall findings due to attrition is low. Despite these promising results, we do find that women leaving our sample across both treatment arms differ in terms of background characteristics from those who remain in our sample (p-values shown in cols. 3 and 6). For example, women who leave the sample are generally younger, better educated, in monogamous partnerships (vs. polygamous), and live in smaller households. This may be reflective of rural-to-urban migration or other mobility patterns, although these differences are not generally observed for pathway variables, including indicators of economic standing.